Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Ski Size advice please

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Hi All

I was after a little bit of advice please and Id be really happy of anyone can let me know.

I used to Ski a lot, several weeks a season and to a good standard, Id be happy to ski anything anywhere (except some extreme couloirs). I spent most of my time on the Grands Montets and La Grave I haven't skied for several years however due to getting married etc.etc.etc.

I started out on long Vokl's about a foot taller than me (that feels like a very long time ago), and just before I stopped skiing I was on an all mountain Bandits (I think they were rosignol) they came to about my nose if I remember.

Anyway I am going skiing in a couple of weeks and will be hiring skis and boots, I went to the snow place at Castleford last week and it all came back quickly by the end of the hour I was really comfortable turning nicely and going down the (small) moguls off to the side. I didn't think to look at the length of skis they gave me.

I know that things change in the equipment world, and it may have passed me bye - is nose height a sensible length to go for with an all mountain type ski?

Thanks in advance for any assistance, and any jokes about an old man getting back into it will be taken with good humour.

All the best.
latest report     
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
To give a reasonably accurate answer, can you give:
- Weight
- Height
- Speed you like to ski
- Whether you are going to remain on Piste...or more All Mountain.

Would it be reasonable to describe you as an advanced skier? - if hiring, you should have the option of changing lengths if you get it wrong
snow report     
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Hi thanks for the reply, I'm 5'11' and 13 stone 7 pounds, and I would have described myself as advanced 10 years ago when i last skied.

Thanks.
snow conditions     
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Sorry I want so ski all mountain - and with regard to speed I prefer to have fun and enjoy the turns.
ski holidays     
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
My best guess would be 175 - 180
latest report     
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Thanks, that's 175 is eye level and 180 is top of my head, Ill try 175 on the first day and go from there.
snow report     
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
montets wrote:
Sorry I want so ski all mountain - and with regard to speed I prefer to have fun and enjoy the turns.

In that case 180 or possibly a touch longer - with a width of 88-93mm for more On Piste (All Mountain Ski)....or around 100mm for 50/50 for more Off Piste (Freeride Ski).

If you haven't used a ski wider than the Bandit, it would probably be better to look at 88-90mm skis....but it's trial and error.
snow report     
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Thanks.
snow conditions     
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
I don’t really think ~93 vs ~100 mm makes all that much difference?

I’m a reasonably stong skier, 167 height, (62kgs) ski for daily skis 173s, 98mm underfoot. Nearly went 180, but didn’t give advantage.

Make of that what you will.

“Have fun and enjoy the turns” is surely meaningless?
snow conditions     
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@under a new name, IIRC Rossignol Bandits were around mid 70s in width - so going from that to 100mm might feel awkward. I took a bit of time to get used to 93mm, having skied almost entirely on 63 or 70mm width.
ski holidays     
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Thanks everyone.
snow conditions     
 And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
@montets, I was the same stats as you and also skied on Bandits 10 years ago. Do you remember what colour they were? White, Blue or Green? The B2's (White or Blue) were 76/78mm underfoot depending on year and the B3 83mm. The most common lengths were 174 to 176cm which would be nose height for you.

If you're just getting back into it, I would pick something of similar dimensions to ease the familiarity. Most skis now are wider than they used to be and have some form of early rise tip (or rocker) which makes them ski shorter than their stated length. Therefore you should go a little a little longer than nose height to get the same edge grip. I loved the original Bandit B2 in the 176cm length but in later years usually skied something around a 177cm in the low 80's for width, without rocker. I'm a stone heavier now and my everyday ski is a Kastle MX83 in a 183cm (without rocker) but I'm a much better skier than I was 10 years ago which is also a factor. On a rockered ski, I go longer still but it depends also on how stiff/wide it is.

Although "All-mountain" is often quoted as 95-100mm under foot, I absolutely would not recommend that size until you get your legs back. Even then, you might find the characteristics too different to adjust quickly to, especially in hire boots. That extra width will exacerbate any lack of response from slop in your boot. Same goes for anything around 90mm. It won't be quite as bad but it'll still feel odd. I'd put money that the skis you quickly adjusted to at Castleford were intermediate level in the mid/high 70's for width, same as the old Bandit B2's.

I'd start with a width that's familiar(ish), just a little longer. So low 80's underfoot and around 180cm long would be my recommendation. You can always swap them in the hire shop later in the week if you want to try something wider.
snow conditions     
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
I seem to remember them as red, blue and white, but I could be mistaken! memory is not what it used to be!

Thanks for the really good advice, to you and everyone else.
latest report     
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Ive googled images and they were the red and white ones. No Blue! must have imagined that!
snow report     
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
montets wrote:
I seem to remember them as red, blue and white, but I could be mistaken! memory is not what it used to be!

The red and white ones were the first generation, circa 2003. Bandit X, XX or XXX. The XX was the most common and was 74mm underfoot. The XXX was 90mm but pretty rare and had an unforgiving reputation. You could have been on those if you were skiing around La Grave but I think you'd remember?

Graphics were almost identical on all three models. Don't remember any blue though, maybe your bindings were blue?
snow report     
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
montets wrote:
Ive googled images and they were the red and white ones. No Blue! must have imagined that!

You beat me to it! Very Happy
snow conditions     
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
I think you are right XX's gosh I thought it was only 10 years ago not 15! What have I been doing with my life!
snow conditions     
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
montets wrote:
I think you are right XX's gosh I thought it was only 10 years ago not 15! What have I been doing with my life!

Not enough skiing! Laughing
snow report     
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
montets wrote:
with regard to speed I prefer to have fun and enjoy the turns.


What's that meant to mean?!!! Puzzled

Sorry officer I don't know how fast I was going... I was having fun and enjoying the turns. That's OK right?
latest report     
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@montets, I can't guarantee that they'll be available for rent but in the current range I would consider the Experience 84HD to be the spiritual successor to Bandit XX/B2. For your stats, 178cm long. You can research them and it'll give you an idea of what to look for when you see the available rental list.

Enjoy your trip. snowHead
snow report     
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
'with regard to speed I prefer to have fun and enjoy the turns'.

What I mean by that is I'm not bothered about going super fast, I guess if I did I'd be looking at some downhill or GS ski's.

I do get overtaken by people who are not putting in any turns - Do you see what I mean now?
ski holidays     
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@montets,
Blizzard Brahma is one all mountain ski I’ve enjoyed that I think would suit the terrain you mention.
I’ve also used a couple of more recent season issues skis, Volkl and Atomic, but would have to look up exact model names.
170–178 max sounds right length range to me.

After La Grave, most pistes are not too challenging are they? Enjoy your skiing renaissance. As a senior myself, never too late to learn a few more tricks snowHead
ski holidays     
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
@Old Fartbag, it depended on whether they were were B1, 2, or 3, probably 2s in fairness to you which weren’t terribly wide (mid 70s?).

Not my favourite ever ski.

@montets, now I understand, and re Bandits, I should have read all posts Embarassed Twisted Evil My recollection of a mate’s XXXs was that the black turned to dark blue in places.

Nice marketing.

Make sure you find a nice shop and then you can try various models.
latest report     
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Thanks for all the help guys, I setoff soon, and am starting to get excited!
ski holidays     
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I used to ski bandit b2s and b3s 15+ years ago when I did a couple of seasons in Chamonix. Mostly skiing Les Grands Montets. I got back into skiing 3-4 years ago and have found a one ski for all things to be non-existent. I first went for 180cm Brahmas but found them a little unforgiving. This year I'm on Dynastar Speedzones in 174 and 182 for on piste. I have some Dynastar Cham 97s (Legends this year) in 182ish for off piste stuff. Very happy with the set up. I'm 5 foot 11 tall and 12.5 stone. HTH
ski holidays     
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Rather than start a new thread i figured i'd hijack this one. I'm looking at getting a set of rossignol Sky 7 HD, most places seem to have 164 in stock, i'm 5'10, about 13 stone. I have a set of Head Power instinct pro Ti 184's, and i found them fine for on piste in andorra, however when i took them to chamonix and was taken off piste with some more experienced friends who knew the mountain there i felt i just wasn't strong enough for them and struggled. would the rossi's be too small? especially off piste i'm not concerned about top end speed, but want something thats easier to control with good float etc. i'm thinking if i got the shorter rossi, with the longer heads in my quiver i'd have a good range to choose from depending on what the conditions offer, or would folk recommend something a little longer than 164? would going for 170 for example make that much difference off piste? would they be unstable on piste? an alternative i'm looking at could be the Dynastar Legend Pro Xpress in 170, though that is slightly narrower. any useful opinions are welcome!
ski holidays     
 And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
@MountainIdiot, yep, too short – they’d be at the shorter end of my quiver, and I’m less than the the length of them and about 5 stone lighter! With rockered off piste skis, it’s common to go longer than your piste skis, so maybe 180 in these. Although it’s the width that will make the difference *stop sniggering at the back*, you don’t want them too short and unstable. Usability on piste will be worse than the Heads on hardpack, but should be manageable otherwise. Again, don’t go too short.
latest report     
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@Scarlet, ah yes, hadn’t taken the rocker into account properly, what you say makes a lot of sense. Perhaps the Dynastar in 170 length would be more suitable then in what I’m looking for, (118/90/108) . I realistically want something that will be quite playful and easier to manoeuvre, however as we are heading to the three valleys, the sheer volume of piste there will probably mean we don’t end up going off too much anyway.

Though on the flip side I’ve aleady started a programme on the bike with a view to having more strength in my legs by January, maybe I should just man up and stick with the heads!
snow report     
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@MountainIdiot, your head skis are ‘only’ 80mm under foot, so it will be a lot easier (and way more fun) offpiste on some wider skis. Your height is 178cm in metric and you’re not too light, so I think you could go for 180cm length skis. As @Scarlet says if they are rockered and especially twin tip they’ll feel much shorter. The ideal way would be to go for a ski test. Failing that, Rossi Soul and Sin and skis most people seem to get on with (UCPA use them for their offpiste courses).
snow report     
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
180 ish. 100 mm+, plenty of rocker, 5 point design. Mayve a bit of camber underfoot if you can find it for grip on hard pistes.
snow report     
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
thanks for the advice guys, think i'm going to have to re-evaluate my parameters, guess the other half will just have to put up with me looking at ski's all day for a bit longer!
ski holidays     
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
I still have my B2s in the garage. Went from those to 98mm Nordica Enforcers with no problem.
latest report     
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
under a new name wrote:
I don’t really think ~93 vs ~100 mm makes all that much difference?

I’m a reasonably stong skier, 167 height, (62kgs) ski for daily skis 173s, 98mm underfoot. Nearly went 180, but didn’t give advantage.

Make of that what you will.

“Have fun and enjoy the turns” is surely meaningless?

62Kgs!!!!!!!!
ski holidays     
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
@Jonny996, ? Only 167 tall and possibly not partaking in too many pie barms...
latest report     
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
So serious question here... @MountainIdiot is 5'10" which (since skis tend to be metric) is circa 178cm and people are saying that he/she should be looking for 180cm skis.

I'm 6'7", which in metric terms is 201cm... WTF am I actually meant to be skiing? At the moment I ski 190cm Whitedot Ragnaroks and 184cm Head Revs, and hopefully some new Whitedots coming in a 184cm because it's the only length they do in that ski. What am I missing out on? Because nobody seems to do a ski in my size.

Is it a case that technique can compensate for this? What am I missing out on that I would have available, if I could find myself a pair of 205cm skis?
ski holidays     
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
I'm 5'10" and 13.4 in old money.

I ski on piste 170cm slalom skis as a Scotland kick around and 181cm Kaestle HP95's as my all day ski in resort. EG 3V's.

Glide and slide have these on sale just now. Best skis I've ever been on.
latest report     
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@dp, there are some manufacturers that do big. Volkl did a 203 Shiro and Movement a 202 Superturbo IIRC. But the basic answer is you're not missing out on anything. Just get the biggest length in a model and it's designed for the big guys and/ or the top skills.

Main problem is that normal spectrum people have a tendency with modern skis to go too short. Consider as a reference that all men ski a 165 SL ski - it's the minimum length. And those things are stiff as anything and have effective edge from near the short tip to the tail. And that's for as tight and turny as anyone should want to go.

So add tip and tail rocker and a longer tip rise and the effective edge is much shorter. Yet people want them for an all mountain ski with stability in chop and presumably some utility on groomers to get back to the lift. For a 5 ft 10 13+ stone guy this would suggest 172/3 is too short and they should size up. For a tiny man wink like UANN his size choice is fine, though in reality his ability is probably enough that he could handle a 190.
snow conditions     
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Agreed, I love my 165 slalom skis but I do most of my skiing on 185 big fat things. I'm 76kg and 176CM tall.
ski holidays     
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
I'm 176cm also but I'm 108.5kg (believe it or not but I do actually run 40-50km per week) & I'm on Rossi 83's at 168 but I stay on piste, think I would sink if I went off
snow report     



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy